Transparency Should Trump Trust

Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009)

Hart Blanton, James Jaccard, Jonathan Klick, Barbara Mellers, Gregory Mitchell, Philip E. Tetlock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The rebuttals offered by the authors whose data we reanalyzed (A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold, 2001; J. C. Ziegert & P. J. Hanges, 2005) address secondary issues that do not alter our primary message: The evidence for the predictive validity of the race Implicit Association Test is too fragile to support the strong claims that have been made about the pervasiveness of prejudice and the linkages between Implicit Association Test scores and discriminatory behavior. Greater caution in both the legal and scientific communities is warranted. Most importantly, scientific research on implicit bias needs greater transparency and willingness to open raw data to critical scrutiny, not greater trust and deference among researchers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)598-603
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Volume94
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2009

Fingerprint

Research Personnel
Research

Keywords

  • discrimination
  • Implicit Association Test
  • implicit bias
  • predictive validity
  • replication

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Transparency Should Trump Trust : Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009). / Blanton, Hart; Jaccard, James; Klick, Jonathan; Mellers, Barbara; Mitchell, Gregory; Tetlock, Philip E.

In: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94, No. 3, 05.2009, p. 598-603.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Blanton, Hart ; Jaccard, James ; Klick, Jonathan ; Mellers, Barbara ; Mitchell, Gregory ; Tetlock, Philip E. / Transparency Should Trump Trust : Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009). In: Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009 ; Vol. 94, No. 3. pp. 598-603.
@article{d8dfbd442da1487cb52a823ae962bdde,
title = "Transparency Should Trump Trust: Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009)",
abstract = "The rebuttals offered by the authors whose data we reanalyzed (A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold, 2001; J. C. Ziegert & P. J. Hanges, 2005) address secondary issues that do not alter our primary message: The evidence for the predictive validity of the race Implicit Association Test is too fragile to support the strong claims that have been made about the pervasiveness of prejudice and the linkages between Implicit Association Test scores and discriminatory behavior. Greater caution in both the legal and scientific communities is warranted. Most importantly, scientific research on implicit bias needs greater transparency and willingness to open raw data to critical scrutiny, not greater trust and deference among researchers.",
keywords = "discrimination, Implicit Association Test, implicit bias, predictive validity, replication",
author = "Hart Blanton and James Jaccard and Jonathan Klick and Barbara Mellers and Gregory Mitchell and Tetlock, {Philip E.}",
year = "2009",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1037/a0014666",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "94",
pages = "598--603",
journal = "Journal of Applied Psychology",
issn = "0021-9010",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transparency Should Trump Trust

T2 - Rejoinder to McConnell and Leibold (2009) and Ziegert and Hanges (2009)

AU - Blanton, Hart

AU - Jaccard, James

AU - Klick, Jonathan

AU - Mellers, Barbara

AU - Mitchell, Gregory

AU - Tetlock, Philip E.

PY - 2009/5

Y1 - 2009/5

N2 - The rebuttals offered by the authors whose data we reanalyzed (A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold, 2001; J. C. Ziegert & P. J. Hanges, 2005) address secondary issues that do not alter our primary message: The evidence for the predictive validity of the race Implicit Association Test is too fragile to support the strong claims that have been made about the pervasiveness of prejudice and the linkages between Implicit Association Test scores and discriminatory behavior. Greater caution in both the legal and scientific communities is warranted. Most importantly, scientific research on implicit bias needs greater transparency and willingness to open raw data to critical scrutiny, not greater trust and deference among researchers.

AB - The rebuttals offered by the authors whose data we reanalyzed (A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold, 2001; J. C. Ziegert & P. J. Hanges, 2005) address secondary issues that do not alter our primary message: The evidence for the predictive validity of the race Implicit Association Test is too fragile to support the strong claims that have been made about the pervasiveness of prejudice and the linkages between Implicit Association Test scores and discriminatory behavior. Greater caution in both the legal and scientific communities is warranted. Most importantly, scientific research on implicit bias needs greater transparency and willingness to open raw data to critical scrutiny, not greater trust and deference among researchers.

KW - discrimination

KW - Implicit Association Test

KW - implicit bias

KW - predictive validity

KW - replication

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=65649139625&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=65649139625&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0014666

DO - 10.1037/a0014666

M3 - Article

VL - 94

SP - 598

EP - 603

JO - Journal of Applied Psychology

JF - Journal of Applied Psychology

SN - 0021-9010

IS - 3

ER -